The catfight in Mark Steyn’s mind
Iâ€™m not unsympathetic to the premise of Ron Rosenbaumâ€™s argument â€” that, compared to the happy-face banality of John Edwardsâ€™ and Barack Obamaâ€™s public personas, thereâ€™s something rather appealing about Hillary Clintonâ€™s naked viciousness. And, indeed, after Elizabeth Edwards remarked that Hillaryâ€™s life was less â€œjoyfulâ€ than hers, it was hard not to warm to a woman so determined to confirm her joylessness that sheâ€™s prepared to have genial Mrs Edwards kneecapped in a dark alley and forced into an abject apology.
My problem begins when Rosenbaum expands the proposition to argue that, in a field of Democrat wimps, Hillâ€™s the one to back to stick it to the jihadists. I yield to no-one in my respect for the Clintonsâ€™ ruthless brutal demolition of Newt, and that guy who succeeded Newt for 20 minutes, and Gennifer and Kathleen and all the rest. But thereâ€™s no evidence to suggest either Clinton has any interest in applying these techniques to tougher adversaries beyond these shores. Thereâ€™s a world of difference between the politics of personal destruction and the geostrategic kind. Beating up breast-cancer survivors is no indication youâ€™ll do the same to Ahmadinejad or Kim Jong-Il.
I guess Elizabeth Edwards is lucky that Hillary didn’t have her killed and her nude body left in a park for Mark Steyn, SVU to investigate(Hillary in the library with a Louisville Slugger). On the other hand, if incivility to cancer survivors disqualifies one for the Presidency, I guess that Newt Gingrich had better keep his seat warm on the bench.